Computer Assisted Review – Electronic Discovery Law

e-DAT Practice Group Partner and Solutions Analyst to Attend ILTACON Annual Conference 2023

Aug 17 2023

Rachel Tausend, a partner of the K&L Gates e-Discovery Analysis & Technology (“e-DAT”) Group and the firm’s Seattle office, and Krysta Slavik, an e-DAT Group Solutions Analyst based in Pittsburgh, will attend the ILTACON Annual Conference 2023, which begins this Sunday.. Both Rachel and Krysta will participate in panel discussions at the conference, which features a wealth of programs, educational content, and networking opportunities for the legal leaders, managers, professionals, and technologists in attendance.

e-DAT Practice Group Partner to Attend EDRM Detroit Symposium 2023

May 31 2023

Daniel Miller, a partner of the K&L Gates e-Discovery Analysis & Technology (“e-DAT”) Group and the firm’s Pittsburgh office, will attend this week’s EDRM Detroit Symposium 2023. Both Daniel and Krysta Slavik, an e-DAT Group Solutions Analyst based in Pittsburgh, are participating in committees for the “EDRM 2.0” initiative, which focuses on how e-discovery will evolve and adapt in light of advancements in artificial intelligence. The EDRM Detroit Symposium 2023 will feature meetings related to this new initiative, presentations about trends in electronic discovery, and a panel discussion on e-discovery missteps.

LexisNexis Practice Note – “E-discovery: Planning for and Conducting E-discovery (WA)”

Dec 23 2022

Focusing on procedural rules and case law particular to Washington, Julie Anne Halter (Partner and e-DAT Practice Group Co-Chair) and Bree Kelly (e-DAT Senior Staff Lawyer) provide practical guidance for the state’s legal practitioners on each step of the e-discovery process in their recent LexisNexis Practice Note.

Livingston v. City of Chicago (Northern District of Illinois, 2020)

Sep 03 2020

Key Insight: A responding party is best suited to determine the method of review and using TAR to pre-cull documents from review is an acceptable methodology

Nature of Case: Hiring discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Emails

Keywords: Chicago, fire department, technology assisted review, TAR

View Case Opinion

Lawson v. Spirit Aerosystems (Kansas, 2020)

Jun 18 2020

Key Insight: When plaintiff was allowed to dictate defendant’s electronic discovery process, cost shifting to plaintiff is appropriate when electronic discovery performed was not proportionate to the case

Nature of Case: Employment non-compete agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic records

Keywords: Cost shifting, technology assisted review, TAR, aerospace

View Case Opinion

In re Mercedes-Benz Emissions Litig. (District of NJ, 2020)

Jan 09 2020

Key Insight: dispute over search terms meant to identify documents

Nature of Case: environmental litigation

Electronic Data Involved: all discovery, search term protocol

Keywords: search term protocol, predictive coding, technology assisted review,

View Case Opinion

County of Cook v. Bank of America Corp. (N.D. Ill., 2019)

Oct 22 2019

Key Insight: Absolute perfection is not a goal of the discovery process. The county’s claim of burden is unsubstantiated, there is no burden claimed but for ESI privilege review. The burden does not outweigh the proportionality here.

Nature of Case: Fair Housing Act violations

Electronic Data Involved: ESI information concerning mortgage, marketing, etc

Keywords: Proportionality, TAR, burden

View Case Opinion

IN RE: 3M COMBAT ARMS EARPLUG PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (N.D. Fla., 2019)

Jul 01 2019

Key Insight: Court approved TAR protocol detailing disclosure of samples, null set, and blind review

Nature of Case: Product liability

Electronic Data Involved: electronic data

Keywords: TAR protocol

View Case Opinion

In Re: MacBook Keyboard Litigation (N.D. Cal. , 2019)

Jun 21 2019

Key Insight: Court did not grant motion to allow only TAR review but ordered cost estimate for cost shifting if requesting party proceeds with insisting review of 100k documents with 1-2% relevance rate

Keywords: low responsive rate and TAR

View Case Opinion

In Re Domestic Airline Travel Antitrust Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2656, Misc. No. 15-1404 (D.D.C., 2018)

Sep 13 2018

Key Insight: Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery, unforeseen or unanticipated matters.

Nature of Case: unlawful restraint of trade class action

Electronic Data Involved: 3.5 million predominantly non-responsive documents produced by defendant, predictive coding.

Keywords: deficient TAR process, 3.5 million documents, predictive coding, preposterous, glitch.

Tag:Computer Assisted Review